Ring Currents in the Dismutational Aromatic Si6R6.

код для вставки на сайт или в блог

ссылки на документ

Communications
DOI: 10.1002/anie.201003988
Silicon Clusters
Ring Currents in the Dismutational Aromatic Si6R6**
Raphael J. F. Berger,* Henry S. Rzepa, and David Scheschkewitz
In memory of Marie-Madeleine Rohmer
Partially hydrogenated silicon clusters are intermediates in
nucleation processes during the deposition of elemental
silicon from the gas phase by the decomposition of silane
vapors.[1] In addition, residues of such clusters in bulk
materials are thought to be determining factors for the
optoelectronic properties of hydrogenated amorphous and
porous silicon films.[2] In order to elucidate the bonding
situations and relative stabilities, substantial efforts in terms
of computations[3] and experimental gas-phase studies[4] have
thus been directed towards subvalent clusters SinHm (n = 4–
100, m < n). Frequently recurring features, irrespective of
cluster size, are the “naked” vertices with hemispheroidal
tetracoordination in which all bonds point to one side
(Scheme 1).[1–4]
Scheme 1. Neutral silicon clusters 1 and 2 with tetracoordinated
“naked” vertices, and dismutational isomers 3 and 4 of hexasilabenzene (* = silicon; 1, 3: R = Tip = 2,4,6-iPr3C6H2 ; 2: R = SitBu3 ; 4:
R = H).
Si8R6 cluster 2 were known.[6] Even the more widely available
derivatives of germanium, tin, and lead (also referred to as
“metalloid” when the average oxidation number is between 0
and + I) have so far hardly allowed for the deduction of
general rules regarding structure and bonding.[7] Hence, while
Group 14 cluster anions of the Zintl type usually obey the
Wade–Mingos rules[8] and are prime examples of spherical
aromaticity,[9] the electronic situation is often less clear-cut in
the case of neutral partially substituted derivatives.[7]
Recently, some of us reported the isolation and structural
characterization of an isomer of hexasilabenzene, Si6Tip6 (3,
Tip = 2,4,6-triisopropylphenyl), which features a Si6 scaffold
with two unsubstituted, two mono-, and two disubstituted
silicon atoms and hence displays the key features of partially
substituted silicon clusters.[10, 11] The experimentally determined inversion-symmetric structure and the surprising
thermal stability of 3 suggested an unusual bonding situation.
This prompted theoretical calculations, and on this basis a
formerly unknown type of aromaticity was proposed for this
closed-shell compound. The term “dismutational aromaticity” was introduced accounting for the formalism of intramolecular disproportionation (“dismutation”) of four of the
silicon(I) centers of the isomeric Hckel-aromatic hexasilabenzene to generate 3.[10]
An aspect of aromaticity that is readily observable
experimentally by NMR spectroscopy is the strong magnetic
deshielding of atoms that participate in the aromatic ring
current of a molecule. Therefore, while the observed 29Si
NMR chemical shifts for the silicon atoms in 3 with one
substituent at d = 125 ppm (Si2 and Si2’, see Figure 1) are as
expected, the strong highfield shift of atoms Si3 and Si3’ at d =
Isolable neutral compounds with “naked” atoms stabilized by sterically demanding substituents at the remaining
vertices, which could help to attain a better understanding of
structure–property relationships, are scarce in the case of
silicon. Until recently, only the Si5R6 derivative 1[5] and an
[*] Dr. R. J. F. Berger
Fakultt fr Chemie, Universitt Bielefeld
33615 Bielefeld (Germany)
Fax: (+ 49) 521-106-6164
E-mail: raphael.berger@uni-bielefeld.de
Prof. H. S. Rzepa, Dr. D. Scheschkewitz
Department of Chemistry, Imperial College London
London SW7 2AZ (United Kingdom)
[**] Funding by the Aventis Foundation (Karl-Winnacker Fellowship to
D.S.) is gratefully acknowledged.
10006
Figure 1. Calculated[12] [and experimentally determined[10]] interatomic
distances and 29Si chemical shifts of Si6H6 (4) [Si6Tip6 (3)]. Both
structures show Ci symmetry.
2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2010, 49, 10006 –10009
Angewandte
Chemie
90 ppm (see Figure 1) is puzzling, particularly in view of the
calculated NICS(0) value of d = 24 ppm at the center of
symmetry, which supports a strong aromatic character of the
silicon framework (benzene d 10 ppm).
In order to rationalize these seemingly contradictory
results and to shed more light onto the origins of the aromatic
properties of 3, we have investigated the magnetically
induced probability current density field (JB) topology of a
simplified model compound of 3; in the isostructural hexasilabenzene (Si6H6) isomer 4 all organic substituents are
replaced by hydrogen atoms (Figure 1).[11–13] Moreover we
want to advocate the usage of the topology of JB as an
intuitive but also clearly defined property for the classification of aromatic compounds and molecular aromaticity.
JB has very appealing properties for the investigation and
analysis of compounds showing delocalized bonding situations. 1) All anisotropic (a fixed orientation of molecule in the
magnetic field) magnetic field properties (like the susceptibility) can be calculated in a straightforward fashion from JB
simply on basis of the classical electrodynamic Maxwell
equations.[14] 2) A visual inspection of the JB field gives a
quick overview of “how the currents flow” in a molecule,
which give rise to exactly the observed magnetic shielding
properties by (back-) inducing magnetic fields.[15] 3) JB
satisfies a local continuity condition of charge conservation;[16] consequently the field can be represented graphically,
for instance, in the form of closed loops (streamlines).[17]
4) Some general mathematical and physical laws for the
electronic current density topology have been derived,
simplifying the topological analysis to a large extent.[15, 16]
5) If one is willing to accept that “delocalized bonds” are
the origin of molecular magnetic response properties, the
magnetically induced ring-current densities can be regarded
as “footprints” of bond delocalization.
As an example of a ring current topology, in Figure 2 some
representative JB vectors from the molecular plane of a
benzene molecule are shown. The magnetic field vectors in
this work are set perpendicular to the plane of the paper and
Figure 2. a) Representative magnetically induced probability current
density (JB) vectors in the molecular plane of a benzene molecule. The
magnetic field vector points out of the plane of the paper. Very large
and very small vectors are omitted. b) Schematic depiction of current
vortices from (a). (I) shows a diamagnetic vortex, where the black dot
is located at the stagnation point (SP), (II) marks a paramagnetic
vortex SP, and (III) a current saddle SP; the bold line (IV) represents a
half-plane delimited by the axis of symmetry. The currents flowing
through this plane integrate to 15 nAT 1 diamagnetic and 5 nAT 1
paramagnetic contributions, resulting in an overall diamagnetic ring
current of 10 nAT 1 for benzene, a value that can be considered as
typical for the presence of Hckel-type 6 e aromaticity.[13]
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2010, 49, 10006 –10009
point upwards. Figure 2 a shows the numerically calculated JB
vectors, and Figure 2 b shows a representation similar to that
used below in the analysis of 4. The most important
topological features are the points where JB vanishes
[mod(JB) = 0], the so-called stagnation points (SPs).[16]
Three different types of SPs are depicted in Figure 2 b: a
vortex SP in a diamagnetic vortex with a clockwise current (I),
a paramagnetic vortex SP with a counterclockwise vortex (II),
and a saddle SP (III) occurring at an osculation point of four
vortices.
All the existing SPs for one molecule and one B-field
orientation are called a stagnation graph (SG)[16] A molecular
stagnation graph always contains a connected set of points,
the primary graph, originating from a primary vortex at a far
distance from the molecule (which is either dia- or paramagnetic).[16] The SPs in the primary graph usually are
connected roughly along the B field. The SG may contain
other disconnected graphs and may also contain isolated
points. The whole SG uniquely characterizes the complete
topology of JB originating from a certain B field.[16]
In order to investigate the nature of JB in 4, its geometry
was optimized using a correlated ab initio method (MP2).[11]
The resulting structure parameters are partly in excellent
agreement with corresponding parameters found in the solidstate structure of 3, while the agreement in isotropic nuclear
magnetic shielding constants is only qualitatively satisfying
(see Figure 1). The differences must be assigned to the formal
replacement of Tip in 3 with H in the model compound 4. This
is evident from the good agreement of calculated and
experimental shielding parameters in reference [[10]]. In
order to investigate the topology of JB, the direction of the
magnetic field was defined to be perpendicular to the plane p
defined by Si2-Si3-Si2’-Si3’. Sample vectors of JB from planes
parallel to p in different distances from 3 to 3 bohr in steps
of 1 bohr ( 0.53 ), to p are shown in Figure 3 a–g. The
depicted vectors are selected from a range that excludes the
large currents from the strong diamagnetic spherical currents
(loops g in Figure 3 h, vide infra) originating from filled
atomic subshells[18] [mod(JB) > 2 nAT 1] and also very small
vectors [mod(JB) < 0.2 nAT 1]. Consequently, the representations show only the most substantial vectors originating
mostly from the valence electrons. In Figure 3 h a schematic
diagram summarizing the observed current loops is given.
The dominating ring-current contribution can be assigned
to the diamagnetic (clockwise in Figure 3) loop a, which
includes both of the unsubstituted Si atoms (Si3, Si3’) but
excludes the monosubstituted Si atoms Si2 and Si2’. From this
picture it is evident that Si3 and Si3’ are strongly magnetically
shielded owing to the diamagnetic current loop a. The two
closed loops b circulate in a counterclockwise orientation
around atoms Si2 and Si2’ but in a clockwise orientation
around Si3 and Si3’. Therefore, while atoms Si3 and Si3’ are
additionally shielded by the b loop, Si2 and Si2’ are
deshielded owing to a locally counterclockwise orientation
of the b loop in their proximity. Together with the circumvention of Si2 and Si2’ by the a loop, this explains the large
difference in 29Si NMR chemical shifts in atoms Si2(2’) and
Si3(3’). In addition, loop a influences the magnetic field at
atoms Si1 and Si1, which both point into the domain of the
2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.angewandte.org 10007
Communications
magnetic vortex in common planar
aromatic molecules, which always
counteracts to some extent their
magnetic shielding, and locally
especially in the NICS(0) reference
point in the ring center. This important caveat for the consideration of
NICS values was first stated by
Lazeretti.[17]
Our findings exclude the classification of 4 and 3 as 6 e Hckelaromatic analogues since there is no
central paramagnetic vortex, this
being a necessary condition for the
presence of planar aromaticity.
Moreover, such paramagnetic vortices are also present in nonplanar
Figure 3. Planes cut parallel to the Si2-Si3-Si2’-Si3’ plane (p) showing magnetically induced current
Hckel-aromatic analogues (homodensities in 2 when a homogeneous B field is applied perpendicular and at a distance of z to p.
aromatic compounds)[18] such as the
Selected vectors representing the largest contribution of the currents densities from the valence
homotropylium and the 1,3-bishoelectrons are shown. a) z = 1.61 , b) z = 1.06 , c) z = 0.53 , d) z = 0 , e) z = 0.53 ,
motropylium cations. In this way
f) z = 1.06 , g) z = 1.61 . h) Representation of the most significant part of the total valence
1
1
chemically analogous compounds
electron current density. The total ring current integrates to 9.9 nAT (10.1 nAT is the diamagnetic
share the topological characteristics
and 0.2 nAT 1 is the paramagnetic contribution). The vortices labeled with Greek letters are
discussed in the text.
of JB. In fact, the presence of a
central diamagnetic vortex in 3 and
4 is much more reminiscent of the
situation in spherical aromatic compounds[9, 19] such as P4 and
loop resulting in their highfield 29Si NMR shifts. Small
differences between 3 and 4 in the position of Si1(Si1’)
P3As.[20]
relative to loop a might thus have a substantial influence on
On the basis of our findings we advocate the analysis of
the observed magnetic shielding. This explains to a large
the magnetically induced probability current density field
extent the non-negligible differences between the experimentopology as a tool for the systematic and strict categorization
tally observed and calculated chemical shielding parameters
of aromatic compounds. Further investigations including a
in 3 and 4, which are largest for Si1 and Si1’ (Dd = 65 ppm).
detailed topological analysis based on the generation and
The numerical integration of JB over a half-plane (symevaluation of stagnation graphs[16, 17] of 3 and 4 as well as
bolized by the black line in Figure 3 h) cutting the molecule
related compounds are currently in progress.
parallel to the z axis through its center of inversion yields a
Received: June 30, 2010
diamagnetic current contribution of 10.1 nAT 1 and an
Published online: November 16, 2010
almost vanishing paramagnetic current contribution of
0.2 nAT 1. Overall, the magnetically induced ring current
Keywords: cluster compounds ·
is diamagnetic and amounts 9.9 nAT 1, which is approximagnetically induced ring currents · NMR spectroscopy · silicon ·
mately the same as in benzene and hence indicates the
topology
presence of a magnetically induced ring current typical in size
for aromatic molecules. Most remarkably, within this integration scheme there is almost no paramagnetic contribution
to the total current. Moreover, the central vortex d is
diamagnetic as well. This is in complete contrast to the ring[1] For example, a) M. T. Swihart, S. L. Girshik, J. Phys. Chem. B
current topology of benzene and in general must contrast with
1999, 103, 64; b) M. Shiratani, K. Koga, Y. Watanabe, Thin Solid
the ring-current topologies of all planar aromatic molecules of
Films 2003, 427, 1; c) W. M. Nakamura, H. Miyahara, K. Koga,
Dnh symmetry. It can easily be proven on a mathematical basis
M. Shiratani, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2008, 100, 082018; d) N. Ning,
that in all such molecules a paramagnetic central vortex must
S. M. Rinaldi, H. Vach, Thin Solid Films 2009, 517, 6234; e) N.
exist (for instance benzene as depicted in Figure 2).[15]
Ning, H. Vach, J. Phys. Chem. A 2010, 114, 3297.
Consequently, the nonplanar 3 and 4, containing the planar
[2] For example, a) T. V. Torchynska, Superlattices Microstruct.
2009, 45, 267; b) M. Lopez del Puerto, M. Jain, J. R. ChelikowSi2-Si3-Si2’-Si3’ moieties, cannot be classified as instances of
sky, Phys. Rev. B 2010, 81, 035309; c) Ye. S. Shcherbyna, T. V.
planar aromatic or analogous compounds. The fact that the
Torchynska, Thin Solid Films 2010, 518, S204.
integrated induced total currents flowing through 4 and
[3] For example, a) D. K. Yu, R. Q. Zhang, S. T. Lee, J. Appl. Phys.
through benzene are practically equal (both roughly
2002, 92, 7453; b) M. Tang, C. Z. Wang, W. C. Lu, K. M. Ho,
10 nAT 1), while the respective NICS(0) values are more
Phys. Rev. B 2006, 74, 195413; c) X.-J. Li, C.-P. Li, J.-C. Yang,
than twice as large in 4 ( 24 ppm) than in benzene ( 10 ppm)
A. F. Jalbout, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 2009, 109, 1283; d) A. D.
can be explained by the occurrence of the central paraZdetsis, Phys. Rev. B 2009, 79, 195437.
.
10008 www.angewandte.org
2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2010, 49, 10006 –10009
Angewandte
Chemie
[4] a) S. D. Chambreau, L. Wang, J. Zhang, J. Phys. Chem. A 2002,
106, 5081; b) S. J. Peppernicka, K. D. D. Gunaratneb, A. W.
Castleman, Jr., Int. J. Mass Spectr. 2010, 290, 65.
[5] D. Scheschkewitz, Angew. Chem. 2005, 117, 3014; Angew. Chem.
Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 2954.
[6] G. Fischer, V. Huch, P. Mayer, S. K. Vasisht, M. Veith, N. Wiberg,
Angew. Chem. 2005, 117, 8096; Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2005, 44,
7884.
[7] Review: A. Schnepf, Chem. Soc. Rev. 2007, 36, 745.
[8] Review: S. Sevov, J. M. Goicoechea, Organometallics 2006, 25,
5678.
[9] a) Z. Chen, A. Hirsch, S. Nagase, W. Thiel, P. von R. Schleyer, J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 15507; b) Z. Chen, S. Neukermans, X.
Wang, E. Janssens, Z. Zhou, R. E. Silverans, R. B. King,
P. von R. Schleyer, P. Lievens, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128,
12829.
[10] K. Abersfelder, A. J. P. White, H. S. Rzepa, D. Scheschkewitz,
Science 2010, 327, 564.
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2010, 49, 10006 –10009
[11] The MP2/TZVPP level of theory implemented in turbomole [12]
was used throughout this work in connection with standard
parameter settings recommended for the calculation of NMR
shielding constants at this level of theory. gimic [13] was used for
the numerical calculation and integration of JB.
[12] Turbomole 5.10, R. Ahlrichs, M. Br, M. Hser, H. Horn, C.
Klmel, Chem. Phys. Lett. 1989, 162, 165.
[13] J. Juslius, D. Sundholm, J. Gauss, J. Chem. Phys. 2004, 121, 3952.
[14] J. O. Hirschfelder, J. Chem. Phys. 1978, 68, 5151.
[15] S. Pelloni, F. Faglioni, R. Zanasi, P. Lazzeretti, Phys. Rev. A 2006,
74, 012506.
[16] J. A. N. F. Gomes, Phys. Rev. A 1983, 28, 559.
[17] P. Lazzeretti, Prog. Nucl. Magn. Reson. Spectrosc. 2000, 36, 1.
[18] Q. Zhang, S. Yue, X. Lu, Z. Chen, R. Huang, L. Zheng, P. v. R.
Schleyer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 9789.
[19] M. Reiher, A. Hirsch, Chem. Eur. J. 2003, 9, 5442.
[20] B. M. Cossairt, C. C. Cummins, A. R. Head, D. L. Lichtenberger,
R. J. F. Berger, S. A. Hayes, N. W. Mitzel, G. Wu, J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2010, 132, 8459.
2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.angewandte.org 10009